coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation #122764
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
These assertions detect situations where a BCB node would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt |
rustbot
added
T-compiler
|
r? @oli-obk |
|
@bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead. Fixes rust-lang#122738. `@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead. Fixes rust-lang#122738. ``@rustbot`` label +A-code-coverage
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
…llaumeGomez Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#122494 (Simplify key-based thread locals) - rust-lang#122644 (pattern analysis: add a custom test harness) - rust-lang#122723 (Use same file permissions for ar_archive_writer as the LLVM archive writer) - rust-lang#122729 (Relax SeqCst ordering in standard library.) - rust-lang#122740 (use more accurate terminology) - rust-lang#122764 (coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation) - rust-lang#122765 (Add `usize::MAX` arg tests for Vec) - rust-lang#122776 (Rename `hir::Let` into `hir::LetExpr`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead. Fixes rust-lang#122738. ```@rustbot``` label +A-code-coverage
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
…llaumeGomez Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#122644 (pattern analysis: add a custom test harness) - rust-lang#122696 (Add bare metal riscv32 target.) - rust-lang#122723 (Use same file permissions for ar_archive_writer as the LLVM archive writer) - rust-lang#122729 (Relax SeqCst ordering in standard library.) - rust-lang#122740 (use more accurate terminology) - rust-lang#122764 (coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation) - rust-lang#122765 (Add `usize::MAX` arg tests for Vec) - rust-lang#122776 (Rename `hir::Let` into `hir::LetExpr`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead. Fixes rust-lang#122738. ````@rustbot```` label +A-code-coverage
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#122545 (Ignore paths from expansion in `unused_qualifications`) - rust-lang#122644 (pattern analysis: add a custom test harness) - rust-lang#122696 (Add bare metal riscv32 target.) - rust-lang#122729 (Relax SeqCst ordering in standard library.) - rust-lang#122740 (use more accurate terminology) - rust-lang#122749 (make `type_flags(ReError) & HAS_ERROR`) - rust-lang#122764 (coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation) - rust-lang#122765 (Add `usize::MAX` arg tests for Vec) - rust-lang#122776 (Rename `hir::Let` into `hir::LetExpr`) - rust-lang#122786 (compiletest: Introduce `remove_and_create_dir_all()` helper) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2024
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#122545 (Ignore paths from expansion in `unused_qualifications`) - rust-lang#122729 (Relax SeqCst ordering in standard library.) - rust-lang#122740 (use more accurate terminology) - rust-lang#122749 (make `type_flags(ReError) & HAS_ERROR`) - rust-lang#122764 (coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation) - rust-lang#122765 (Add `usize::MAX` arg tests for Vec) - rust-lang#122776 (Rename `hir::Let` into `hir::LetExpr`) - rust-lang#122786 (compiletest: Introduce `remove_and_create_dir_all()` helper) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#122764 - Zalathar:loopy, r=oli-obk coverage: Remove incorrect assertions from counter allocation These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions. For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself. Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead. Fixes rust-lang#122738. `````@rustbot````` label +A-code-coverage
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
These assertions detect situations where a BCB node (in the coverage graph) would have both a physical counter and one or more in-edge counters/expressions.
For most BCBs that situation would indicate an implementation bug. However, it's perfectly fine in the case of a BCB having an edge that loops back to itself.
Given the complexity and risk involved in fixing the assertions, and the fact that nothing relies on them actually being true, this patch just removes them instead.
Fixes #122738.
@rustbot label +A-code-coverage